NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q vs NVIDIA Quadro M2000
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q and NVIDIA Quadro M2000 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q
- Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 8 month(s) later
- Around 45% higher core clock speed: 1152 MHz vs 796 MHz
- Around 22% higher boost clock speed: 1417 MHz vs 1163 MHz
- Around 20% higher texture fill rate: 68.02 GTexel / s vs 56.64 GTexel / s
- Around 20% better floating-point performance: 2,177 gflops vs 1,812 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
- Around 6% higher memory clock speed: 7008 MHz vs 6612 MHz
- Around 34% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 5371 vs 3994
- Around 29% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 18039 vs 13948
- Around 81% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1159.046 vs 639.056
- Around 49% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 5.507 vs 3.697
- 2.3x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 82.067 vs 35.796
- Around 30% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 293.638 vs 225.868
- Around 46% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 8059 vs 5523
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3358 vs 3325
- Around 46% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 8059 vs 5523
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3358 vs 3325
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 3 January 2018 vs 8 April 2016 |
Core clock speed | 1152 MHz vs 796 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 1417 MHz vs 1163 MHz |
Texture fill rate | 68.02 GTexel / s vs 56.64 GTexel / s |
Floating-point performance | 2,177 gflops vs 1,812 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 28 nm |
Memory clock speed | 7008 MHz vs 6612 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 5371 vs 3994 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 18039 vs 13948 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1159.046 vs 639.056 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 5.507 vs 3.697 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 82.067 vs 35.796 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 293.638 vs 225.868 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8059 vs 5523 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 vs 3325 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8059 vs 5523 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 vs 3325 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro M2000
- Around 60% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 569 vs 356
- Around 2% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 55.048 vs 54.188
- Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3684 vs 3579
- Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3684 vs 3579
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 569 vs 356 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 55.048 vs 54.188 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3684 vs 3579 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3684 vs 3579 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro M2000
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
Name | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q | NVIDIA Quadro M2000 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 5371 | 3994 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 356 | 569 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 18039 | 13948 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 54.188 | 55.048 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1159.046 | 639.056 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 5.507 | 3.697 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 82.067 | 35.796 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 293.638 | 225.868 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8059 | 5523 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3579 | 3684 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | 3325 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8059 | 5523 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3579 | 3684 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | 3325 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2219 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q | NVIDIA Quadro M2000 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Pascal | Maxwell 2.0 |
Code name | GP107 | GM206 |
Launch date | 3 January 2018 | 8 April 2016 |
Place in performance rating | 519 | 577 |
Type | Laptop | Workstation |
Launch price (MSRP) | $437.75 | |
Price now | $409.99 | |
Value for money (0-100) | 13.23 | |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1417 MHz | 1163 MHz |
Core clock speed | 1152 MHz | 796 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 2,177 gflops | 1,812 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 768 | 768 |
Texture fill rate | 68.02 GTexel / s | 56.64 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt | 75 Watt |
Transistor count | 3,300 million | 2,940 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | 4x DisplayPort, DP DP DP DP |
G-SYNC support | ||
Number of simultaneous displays | 4 | |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Laptop size | medium sized | |
Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
Length | 201 mm | |
Width | 1" (2.5 cm) | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12 |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
Vulkan | ||
Shader Model | 5 | |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 4 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 112.1 GB / s | |
Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 7008 MHz | 6612 MHz |
Memory type | GDDR5 | 128 Bit |
Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
Multi Monitor | ||
Multi-Projection | ||
VR Ready | ||
3D Vision Pro | ||
Mosaic | ||
nView Desktop Management |